The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Deep Discussion (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   2016 US Presidential Elections Thread [Trump Wins] (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=362353)

GhostTrainer November 2nd, 2016 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivysaur (Post 9472833)
I'm at the point at which I have hit maximum saturation. I can't handle another week of this. I want it to be Tuesday. And I'm worried because talking about this kinda is my job. Help.

I have the same feeling as you do, I'm so damn tired of the presidential election and I just can't wait for Tuesday to roll around so we can find out who we're stuck with for the next 4 years. I know I should care more about this election, and I realize it's great importance, but I just can't stomach any of this anymore.

0 November 2nd, 2016 7:40 PM

Not really ^. You'll come to find that the election really didn't matter much, or at least that's what I've found.

gimmepie November 2nd, 2016 9:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9473532)
Not really ^. You'll come to find that the election really didn't matter much, or at least that's what I've found.

All elections are important and considering this an election that has the potential to legitimize xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and the oppression of the lower classes I'd say that makes it more important than most.

0 November 2nd, 2016 9:26 PM

"All elections are important and considering this an election that has the potential to legitimize xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and the oppression of the lower classes I'd say that makes it more important than most."

Literally every election in history has had this potential. This one is not special, and people need to stop pretending it is. It is not. Both candidates are awful, and I take a vote of "No confidence" myself. No confidence in either of these politicians to do what is right. Neither are special, and in 5 days, we, in the USA, are stuck.

Sigh.

Aliencommander1245 November 2nd, 2016 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9473626)
Literally every election in history has had this potential. This one is not special, and people need to stop pretending it is. It is not. Both candidates are awful, and I take a vote of "No confidence" myself. No confidence in either of these politicians to do what is right. Neither are special, and in 5 days, we, in the USA, are stuck.

Sigh.

Wholeheartedly disagree, i've seen this "both are equally bad" stuff enough when they're clearly not, voting Trump is near universally the worse option by a huge margin due to his genuinely destructive and horribly poorly thought out policies and plans, unabashedly racist, xenophobic and homophobic platform with declarations to roll back important metrics of social progress and genuinely do a poor job of the position he wants to get into.

This election is special because there's been so many firsts in it, so many unheard of occurrences and unprecedented attacks, claims and undermining of basic democratic principals by Trump.

Say what you want about Clinton being shady, she is to an extent, and she'd probably lose against anyone "mild" but she's got political experience, solid plans and policies in place and... isn't a whiny racist, xenophobic, homophobic elderly man telling the country that if he loses then the system is corrupt, but if he wins it isn't all the while constantly lying and spewing misinformation to his followers.

Nah November 3rd, 2016 5:06 AM

I too wish it'd be election day already. There's not much reason to wait any longer and so we might as well get it started.

And then after the 8th can it just magically be the 18th cuz literally all I've been waiting for for like a month is election day and Sun/Moon's release lol

0 November 3rd, 2016 6:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 (Post 9473703)
Wholeheartedly disagree, i've seen this "both are equally bad" stuff enough when they're clearly not, voting Trump is near universally the worse option by a huge margin due to his genuinely destructive and horribly poorly thought out policies and plans, unabashedly racist, xenophobic and homophobic platform with declarations to roll back important metrics of social progress and genuinely do a poor job of the position he wants to get into.

This election is special because there's been so many firsts in it, so many unheard of occurrences and unprecedented attacks, claims and undermining of basic democratic principals by Trump.

Say what you want about Clinton being shady, she is to an extent, and she'd probably lose against anyone "mild" but she's got political experience, solid plans and policies in place and... isn't a whiny racist, xenophobic, homophobic elderly man telling the country that if he loses then the system is corrupt, but if he wins it isn't all the while constantly lying and spewing misinformation to his followers.

-1


You literally did not read my post. I never said anything good in either of them, and yet you say I did.


Do you live in the USA? If you don't, then you don't really get what i am saying. Assume they put an option in the voting process of "No confidence". A landslide would vote for this. Everyone I've seen who votes for either of these candidates is just kidding themselves. You think Clinton has plans? Sure, but not for you. This trump has nothing? Sure he does, but again, not for you.


these people are awful choices. I've had a vote of no confidence for a while, and with good reason. I have not seen anyone who cares for this country, or that would act with compassion, or even care about his people. No confidence at all.

Kanzler November 3rd, 2016 7:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9473626)
"All elections are important and considering this an election that has the potential to legitimize xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and the oppression of the lower classes I'd say that makes it more important than most."

Literally every election in history has had this potential. This one is not special, and people need to stop pretending it is. It is not. Both candidates are awful, and I take a vote of "No confidence" myself. No confidence in either of these politicians to do what is right. Neither are special, and in 5 days, we, in the USA, are stuck.

Sigh.

If you had to rate the previous two elections (Obama vs. McCain and Obama vs. Romney) as well as this current election on a scale of zero to ten about their potential to "legitimize xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and the oppression of the lower classes", where zero is no further oppression than we already have and ten is people openly wearing white robes in the streets, what would you rate them?

0 November 3rd, 2016 7:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 9474063)
If you had to rate the previous two elections (Obama vs. McCain and Obama vs. Romney) as well as this current election on a scale of zero to ten about their potential to "legitimize xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and the oppression of the lower classes", where zero is no further oppression than we already have and ten is people openly wearing white robes in the streets, what would you rate them?

What do you mean wearing white robes? Purity or something?


Listen, I think it can be worse, but your question isn't valid to me. That is to say, I don't really care what someone's beliefs are if they can get shit done in an ethical way.


Member of the KKK and you treat everyone fairly, while not openly hating on blacks? That is to say, economically or otherwise. Fine.


Putting food on the table is what matters to me regardless of someone's beliefs, as long as they behave ethically. That's why I have no confidence in Trump, because while he might get food on the table, I believe he would try to push his beliefs on me. But Hillary is no better. I don't believe she would do anything good for the system regardless of how pure one perceives her beliefs.

Kanzler November 3rd, 2016 7:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9474102)
Listen, I think it can be worse, but your question isn't valid to me. That is to say, I don't really care what someone's beliefs are if they can get **** done in an ethical way.

That doesn't invalidate my question. It's not asking about whether or not you care about someone's beliefs or whether a candidate could get something done, it's about the extent to which each of the past three elections fanned the flames of xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, and other forms of hate and contempt. You said that literally every election in history had this potential. I'm asking whether you can distinguish varying degrees or it's literally all the same to you.

White robes = jab at the KKK.

Primarina November 3rd, 2016 8:26 AM

Here's my slightly ranting plug:

This election is definitely a "higher-stakes" for many, especially those who have one or more identities that fall out of line with straight white male. Though, for those who may fit that category, the results of a Trump election may have grave consequences for there lot as well. The reason being, populism and authoritarianism are on the rise internationally.

Trump's style of governance presents us with a black/white vision of morality, whereas Clinton provides a dark grey/light grey vision of morality. That is, Clinton does what she thinks is more correct (50.1%+) She may faulter, in reprehensible ways when it comes to her record on human rights, LGBT rights, black rights, and even women's rights, but she has more or less been a driving force toward a somewhat better quality of life for all. Though, I think she will also be more free to express more slightly progressive stances (as she has lately) with the support behind the socialist-capitalist vision of bernie sanders. As a conservative-progressive, I prefer when we do progress and adopt massive policy changes that we be clear of how this change will impact our political ecosystem.

Clinton has used corruption as the ONLY way to go from middle-class woman in a misogynistic society, to one of the most powerful women by utilizing masculinized strategies. Whereas, Trump had been given his wealth. Literally he just could have let the money ride on the catch-all stock market investment and still make more money than he has now. So, no, he did not earn his wealth, he literally did not even use it to his fullest potential or even middle-ground potential. Clinton's corruption are nothing new or extraordinary to the realm of the political. Certainly, I would have preferred Sanders, but in many ways Clinton could be considered more timely when populism is on the rise, and we need a strong and intelligent leader to help corral the uprising of populist separatists from global collectivism.

Certainly economic globalism has its flaws, but I like to think that pokemon for instance is a sign of sharing culture through the globalist economy in a manner we would have otherwise not had. Eventually, YES, I want to see progressive changes to make the game of economics more fair, and adopt and incorporate more and more libertarian-socialist changes. Libertarian-socialism is basically allowing individuals to the right to form associations freely, and as such, establish collectivist policy in which individuals agree to limit their individual freedoms on their own terms to then establish collective freedoms. Of course, this process is gradual, and is happening within certain microcosms of cosmopolitan cities. However, populist movements like Brexit are squandering the interactivity and sharing of culture in cosmopolitan settings. If you look at the voting results of Brexit, Londoners decisively voted it down because it takes away their livelihood of living in a place where diversity in and of itself defines their personal culture.

In fact, the culture of diversity itself is far superior to neoconservatism because we cultivate trust, shared humanist identity, and those two things make us SECURE. Soft-power is the long-run strategy for sercurity and peace. Hard-power is the short-run strategy that makes us feel secure, but leaves us far more vulnerable. Clinton represents someone who can effectively negotiate soft-power; it is a more delicate process of persuation. Trump goes in all-or-nothing and has proven to double-down on what he things is "best" without a game-theoretical understanding of security. He will push a nationalist/populist movement in the US (arguably he already has, and influenced Brexit voters -- remember, the entire world is watching this debate). Trump will 100% make us LESS secure in the long-run provided his goal is to make immigration more difficult, suppress minority expression into the dominant culture, discourage a diversity of travelers to coming to the US, encourage the religious right to dominate those of us who want to live free from oppression (aka, LGBTQ+, women), he will make colorblind policy that will retrograde race relationships and maintain white supremacy, invest in defense rather than the economy/social stimulus, and arguably the short-run, we will be less secure as well.

Clinton is corrupt and not really that inspiring. Okay, we get it. But the choice is not even remotely close. Voting for Trump is a vote against the globalism, freedom, diversity, our country, your family, and yourself. Don't be an idiot. This is not a Romney, McCain, Obama, or a Clinton regime where the stakes are slightly lighter or darker gray. Choosing Trump is dangerously-delusional idealism. If you plan to vote Trump either abstain or vote clinton for your own sake if anything -- I'd like to think voters actually care about minorities and pluralism, but clearly, many do not. Disregarding people domestically or abroad make you as an individual less connected and less secure in within a black/white paradigm of identity and morality. Basically, war-like attitudes are cultivated when we see others as the "enemy" and others see us as the "enemy". Clearly I would rather our interests either be aligned or blurred rather than decisively oppositional - Trumpsters just do not get that they may be ordering up WW3 on a platter to countries that may want more international influence and challenge American hegemony.

Don't vote with your gut. Vote with your mind, be fucking reasonable. Rant over.

0 November 3rd, 2016 9:09 AM

What is this I'm reading from the above posts? Do you people really think gender non-binary crap is real? This is what I was talking about with pushing ideas on others. No, I don't want a candidate who caters to every special snowflake in this country and frankly I think it's getting out of hand. And people who advocate for candidates who push the snowflake agenda really make me laugh. It takes a lot to get me inflamed, but this one really bothers me a lot. Trump pushes racisms and whatever other isms you can name off the top? Then what about Hillary pushing a special snowflake agenda?


Man, am I really annoyed by this.


I am also tired of this same rehashing of arguments, saying how great I think Trump is. I DO NOT ADVOCATE FOR TRUMP, please stop replying to me as if I do. I vote for No confidence, so try disputing that, not things that you imply.


No confidence means I advocate for neither candidate. I have seen both of their flaws, I have compared what they both have had to say, and I vote for neither. But again, if you don't live in this country, this is all just speculation and stuff. You don't have to live with the choice for 4-8 years Kanzler, Ivysaur and any other people outside of the USA, Canada, and Mexico. I know the USA is huge, and everyone is effected, but you guys might have 1/100th of what people living in the country will get.

I've also noticed that the people who primarily vote for Trump or no one are from the USA while those who are on the Hillary side are from countries where this will not have nearly as much impact on you as on us.


Rant over.


Now, to answer your question Kanzler, the presidency doesn't have nearly as much impact as others think. Meaning that even if trump is elected, he cannot suddenly be racist and put people where he may or may not want them to be. The president doesn't have that much power. You'd need to be a dictator like Hitler, and to do so, you'd bed unanimous support of the people. Trump nor Hillary have it.

So, I'd give your scale a 3/10.

Primarina:
Spoiler:

[QUOTE=Primarina;9474128]Here's my slightly ranting plug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
This election is definitely a "higher-stakes" for many, especially those who have one or more identities that fall out of line with straight white male.

Lol, wut?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Though, for those who may fit that category, the results of a Trump election may have grave consequences for there lot as well. The reason being, populism and authoritarianism are on the rise internationally.

Wut?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Trump's style of governance presents us with a black/white vision of morality, whereas Clinton provides a dark grey/light grey vision of morality.

Clinton is a shady snake. Trump is more open, but he is similar.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
That is, Clinton does what she thinks is more correct (50.1%+)

Oh, that's great, glad she does what she likes. What is this number?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
She may faulter, in reprehensible ways when it comes to her record on human rights, LGBT rights, black rights, and even women's rights, but she has more or less been a driving force toward a somewhat better quality of life for all.

Clinton. Driving force. Better quality of life. Maximum kek.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Though, I think she will also be more free to express more slightly progressive stances (as she has lately) with the support behind the socialist-capitalist vision of bernie sanders.

I don't even get this one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
As a conservative-progressive, I prefer when we do progress and adopt massive policy changes that we be clear of how this change will impact our political ecosystem.

I just see big words here. What massive policy changes? What is this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Clinton has used corruption as the ONLY way to go from middle-class woman in a misogynistic society, to one of the most powerful women by utilizing masculinized strategies.

Lol, wut? "Corruption is ok, as long as you do it like a man and you are a woman." is what I read from this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Whereas, Trump had been given his wealth. Literally he just could have let the money ride on the catch-all stock market investment and still make more money than he has now.

Ah, this rehashing of people who don't know the stock market. What do you want him to do about this, give up his money and start from scratch? I really don't get this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
So, no, he did not earn his wealth, he literally did not even use it to his fullest potential or even middle-ground potential.

Hmmmm, I though increasing capital from a starting seed and making it grow, by not placing it in the stock market, is actually earning money. What about tech startups? They start with say 100k and make it grow. Would you say they didn't earn it? Again, incoherent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Clinton's corruption are nothing new or extraordinary to the realm of the political. Certainly, I would have preferred Sanders, but in many ways Clinton could be considered more timely when populism is on the rise, and we need a strong and intelligent leader to help corral the uprising of populist separatists from global collectivism.

Glad Clintons corruption is ok, but Trumps racism is not. I'm sorry, what is this populism? This is just a bunch of big words to me. Sounds heavy and smart, but really looks like ramblings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Certainly economic globalism has its flaws, but I like to think that pokemon for instance is a sign of sharing culture through the globalist economy in a manner we would have otherwise not had. Eventually, YES, I want to see progressive changes to make the game of economics more fair, and adopt and incorporate more and more libertarian-socialist changes.

Big words and pokemon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Libertarian-socialism is basically allowing individuals to the right to form associations freely, and as such, establish collectivist policy in which individuals agree to limit their individual freedoms on their own terms to then establish collective freedoms.

Words.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Of course, this process is gradual, and is happening within certain microcosms of cosmopolitan cities. However, populist movements like Brexit are squandering the interactivity and sharing of culture in cosmopolitan settings. If you look at the voting results of Brexit, Londoners decisively voted it down because it takes away their livelihood of living in a place where diversity in and of itself defines their personal culture.

What? They voted FOR brexit...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
In fact, the culture of diversity itself is far superior to neoconservatism because we cultivate trust, shared humanist identity, and those two things make us SECURE.

Just no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Trump will 100% make us LESS secure in the long-run provided his goal is to make immigration more difficult, suppress minority expression into the dominant culture, discourage a diversity of travelers to coming to the US, encourage the religious right to dominate those of us who want to live free from oppression (aka, LGBTQ+, women), he will make colorblind policy that will retrograde race relationships and maintain white supremacy, invest in defense rather than the economy/social stimulus, and arguably the short-run, we will be less secure as well.

It is a countries choice to allow people in or not. Not doing so is not racism. More words.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474128)
Clinton is corrupt and not really that inspiring. Okay, we get it. But the choice is not even remotely close. Voting for Trump is a vote against the globalism, freedom, diversity, our country, your family, and yourself. Don't be an idiot. This is not a Romney, McCain, Obama, or a Clinton regime where the stakes are slightly lighter or darker gray. Choosing Trump is dangerously-delusional idealism. If you plan to vote Trump either abstain or vote clinton for your own sake if anything -- I'd like to think voters actually care about minorities and pluralism, but clearly, many do not. Disregarding people domestically or abroad make you as an individual less connected and less secure in within a black/white paradigm of identity and morality. Basically, war-like attitudes are cultivated when we see others as the "enemy" and others see us as the "enemy". Clearly I would rather our interests either be aligned or blurred rather than decisively oppositional - Trumpsters just do not get that they may be ordering up WW3 on a platter to countries that may want more international influence and challenge American hegemony.

Don't vote with your gut. Vote with your mind, be fucking reasonable. Rant over.

"Trump is bad. Vote Hillary or go home." Also, Clintons corruption is again A OK, but Trumps personal beliefs are not? Whew lad, I now know where you stand.

Primarina November 3rd, 2016 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9474173)
What is this I'm reading from the above posts? Do you people really think gender non-binary crap is real? This is what I was talking about with pushing ideas on others. No, I don't want a candidate who caters to every special snowflake in this country and frankly I think it's getting out of hand. And people who advocate for candidates who push the snowflake agenda really make me laugh. It takes a lot to get me inflamed, but this one really bothers me a lot. Trump pushes racisms and whatever other isms you can name off the top? Then what about Hillary pushing a special snowflake agenda?


Man, am I really annoyed by this.


I am also tired of this same rehashing of arguments, saying how great I think Trump is. I DO NOT ADVOCATE FOR TRUMP, please stop replying to me as if I do. I vote for No confidence, so try disputing that, not things that you imply.


No confidence means I advocate for neither candidate. I have seen both of their flaws, I have compared what they both have had to say, and I vote for neither. But again, if you don't live in this country, this is all just speculation and stuff. You don't have to live with the choice for 4-8 years Kanzler, Ivysaur and any other people outside of the USA, Canada, and Mexico. I know the USA is huge, and everyone is effected, but you guys might have 1/100th of what people living in the country will get.

I've also noticed that the people who primarily vote for Trump or no one are from the USA while those who are on the Hillary side are from countries where this will not have nearly as much impact on you as on us.


Rant over.


Now, to answer your question Kanzler, the presidency doesn't have nearly as much impact as others think. Meaning that even if trump is elected, he cannot suddenly be racist and put people where he may or may not want them to be. The president doesn't have that much power. You'd need to be a dictator like Hitler, and to do so, you'd bed unanimous support of the people. Trump nor Hillary have it.

So, I'd give your scale a 3/10.
[/SPOILER]

You seem to only value your own worldviews. Provide an argument as to why non-binary identities are, as you put it, "crap" --only then can we have a discussion. This is an anti-intellectual post since it provides zero claims or reasons that are falsifiable/debatable based upon substance (my 'pinion is this). To argue something is "crap" you ought to provide evidence -- without evidence it is an uninformed opinion. When many people come together without informed opinions, we get populism. There is evidence that supports suicide, depression, anxiety, workplace discrimination, among other things that affect non-binary people, you might want to, you know, understand why someone would choose to put themselves through that misery. If you want to swing the whole "mental illness" route, provide evidence. Otherwise, your "opinion" is really not your own. It's rather just affirming the position that you know without actually making an informed choice yourself. Maybe you do not want to be a special snowflake, and would rather reside your faith in others, rather than making your own perspective based upon a plurality of views?

Also, Londoners as a sub-population overwhelmingly voted to remain -not including the UK as a whole, including rural areas disconnected from multiculturalism. I think you assumed since Brexit passed that all constituencies equally voted for it. The whole is not equal to the sum of its part. You might want to work on reading comprehension, since black/white thinking blinds people to nuanced understanding and instead leads them to make false claims.

As for the other claims, they seem to fall under the category of "that's crap", "uh-uh", "no way", "big words", "too confused" or some other anti-intellectual appeal. So, I do not want to put too much work in to going over all the other unsupported and inarticulate claims you have made until you have something of substance for me to respond to.

Also, over 50%, 50.1+%, implies a preponderance of evidence. This is the underlying logic of the majority voting system. When we replicate these voting scenarios we slowly progress, whereas voting in terms of complete overhaul which may impact myself and others very lives implies a choice to change ought to require a greater degree of support to elicit severe change. Thus, why the entire logic of preponderance is geared toward stability rather than radical swings that put our security at risk.

Overall, you are making yourself out to be uninformed and arrogant -- in other words, delusional and reckless, much like Trump.

Esper November 3rd, 2016 11:11 AM

I mean, I get wanting to hold out for something better, but the election happens whether you're involved or not. A vote of no confidence is a vote to let other people make your choices for you. If you live in a heavily red or blue state it may make no difference to the electoral college, but the race is looking close and the popular vote totals could matter.

Trump or Clinton is going to be president and there are differences in their potential presidencies. Let me put it another way. If you're a fan of Bernie Sanders (don't know if you are, just using this as an example) which potential president do you think is going to be more likely to listen to anything he proposes or will be willing to work with him in any capacity? If Bernie isn't your guy, then just ask that question with a different senator or representative or governor or whoever you want. If you care about a certain issue or set of issues, which candidate do you think will be better for those issues, will work with the people supporting the issues you care about? It may be that you don't think either candidate particularly cares for a certain issue, but think about how they would respond if their party or congress pushed for it. That's another area of potential differences.

There's a lot of things you can consider about the two candidates. I'd suggest that there are many more differences than similarities. If you think that there is no difference at all when it comes to all the things you care about then I suggest you dig more into politics, economics, science, diplomacy, and so on because there is a host of things that are affected by who becomes president.

Kanzler November 3rd, 2016 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9474173)
Now, to answer your question Kanzler, the presidency doesn't have nearly as much impact as others think. Meaning that even if trump is elected, he cannot suddenly be racist and put people where he may or may not want them to be. The president doesn't have that much power. You'd need to be a dictator like Hitler, and to do so, you'd bed unanimous support of the people. Trump nor Hillary have it.

So, I'd give your scale a 3/10.

Well, I asked you to rate the past three elections on a scale of 1-10, not to rate my own scale (how meta), but I won't push it further.

Nah November 3rd, 2016 12:27 PM

feel free to make a separate thread for gender things y'all

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9474173)
I am also tired of this same rehashing of arguments, saying how great I think Trump is. I DO NOT ADVOCATE FOR TRUMP, please stop replying to me as if I do. I vote for No confidence, so try disputing that, not things that you imply.

What people are saying is that it's obvious that both candidates are not equally bad. It's not an invalid claim to say both are bad, but one is worse than the other, regardless of what someone thinks of Trump and Hillary.


Quote:

You don't have to live with the choice for 4-8 years Kanzler, Ivysaur and any other people outside of the USA, Canada, and Mexico.

I've also noticed that the people who primarily vote for Trump or no one are from the USA while those who are on the Hillary side are from countries where this will not have nearly as much impact on you as on us.
fun facts: Kanzler is Canadian and I'm an American who's voting for Hillary Clinton this Tuesday.

Kanzler November 3rd, 2016 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nah (Post 9474378)
fun facts: Kanzler is Canadian and I'm an American who's voting for Hillary Clinton this Tuesday.

As exciting as a Trump presidency would be, I'm very concerned about the economy and if the American economy tanks, I might be out of decent job opportunities because I'd be paid by the government and they need good tax dollars from a robust economy. So sorry Trump, my economic well-being is much more important than the excitement and seismic shift in history that President Trump would represent.

Somewhere_ November 3rd, 2016 1:27 PM

If we want to talk about self-interest...

According to the Tax Policy Center and Tax Foundation, a Trump presidency would raise my wages. Although he would significantly increase the national debt. But Ill have to pay off social security and that in the future anyways, so its still in my self-interest to have a Trump presidency.

But I can't even vote, so it doesnt even matter.

0 November 3rd, 2016 2:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esper (Post 9474287)
I mean, I get wanting to hold out for something better, but the election happens whether you're involved or not. A vote of no confidence is a vote to let other people make your choices for you. If you live in a heavily red or blue state it may make no difference to the electoral college, but the race is looking close and the popular vote totals could matter.

Trump or Clinton is going to be president and there are differences in their potential presidencies. Let me put it another way. If you're a fan of Bernie Sanders (don't know if you are, just using this as an example) which potential president do you think is going to be more likely to listen to anything he proposes or will be willing to work with him in any capacity? If Bernie isn't your guy, then just ask that question with a different senator or representative or governor or whoever you want. If you care about a certain issue or set of issues, which candidate do you think will be better for those issues, will work with the people supporting the issues you care about? It may be that you don't think either candidate particularly cares for a certain issue, but think about how they would respond if their party or congress pushed for it. That's another area of potential differences.

There's a lot of things you can consider about the two candidates. I'd suggest that there are many more differences than similarities. If you think that there is no difference at all when it comes to all the things you care about then I suggest you dig more into politics, economics, science, diplomacy, and so on because there is a host of things that are affected by who becomes president.

This was an actual intellectual response, and I appreciate it.

So, to answer, I rethought about the issue. A lot of people say that no vote = a vote for trump/hillary, which never made sense. But you have a point about not voting. However, the reason why I abstain from voting is because I feel the system itself is rotten. View it like a plank of wood, and there is a lot of rot (corruption) in the wood. There is so much so that, while you could sand it this way or that, the wood itself is what's rotten, and you can't really fix that. You'd need new would. That's how I view the two party system, and it's also how I view these candidates. You either have to vote left or right, and there is very little middle ground.

To me, each candidate might have good points and positions and thoughts, but 3 good points out of a few hundred negative ones doesn't sit well with me. Voting for a third party doesn't work, because not enough people will vote. I'm a somewhat private person, and I feel that it's not worth the effort to get registered just to fail. I know, people will say if you never try you won't succeed, but that's how it is.

Unfortunately, there are too many people in the country, and the actual voting process is decided by a few hundred people out of 300+ million. So, it's easy to see why I am taking a stance of no confidence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadSheep (Post 9474453)
If we want to talk about self-interest...

According to the Tax Policy Center and Tax Foundation, a Trump presidency would raise my wages. Although he would significantly increase the national debt. But Ill have to pay off social security and that in the future anyways, so its still in my self-interest to have a Trump presidency.

But I can't even vote, so it doesnt even matter.

That's very interesting. Again, I try to stay out of it, but I could really use high wages. What I have is not enough. But to raise the above point again, he has too many negatives that I can't see putting in the effort to register my information and vore. I'd rather just get a better job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 9474323)
Well, I asked you to rate the past three elections on a scale of 1-10, not to rate my own scale (how meta), but I won't push it further.

5, 2, 3, 6
Bush, Mccain, Romney, Trump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nah (Post 9474378)
What people are saying is that it's obvious that both candidates are not equally bad. It's not an invalid claim to say both are bad, but one is worse than the other, regardless of what someone thinks of Trump and Hillary.

fun facts: Kanzler is Canadian and I'm an American who's voting for Hillary Clinton this Tuesday.

Good point to the first part, but even if one is slightly better, it's still not enough. I personally lean more toward Trump, but I don't think he's fit to run the country. But who knows, maybe he is.

I knew that Kanzler was Canadian. I was going to leave it to USA only, but I remembered NATO, and how a presidency could effect it. I know Ivysaur is from Madrid, so it won't effect him nearly as much as you and me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanzler (Post 9474408)
As exciting as a Trump presidency would be, I'm very concerned about the economy and if the American economy tanks, I might be out of decent job opportunities because I'd be paid by the government and they need good tax dollars from a robust economy. So sorry Trump, my economic well-being is much more important than the excitement and seismic shift in history that President Trump would represent.

Economy rises and falls. Presidency doesn't have even a 1/10th stake in that.

Though that was part of the reason why I first thought Trump would be an interesting candidate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primarina (Post 9474231)
Response

I don't really have much to say to this. EDIT: Yes I did :)

To me, non binary roles, genders, or whatever the hell it is is just made up stuff. Don't get me wrong, traditional roles are made up as well, but they worked and have worked for 5000+ years because they are functional and have a purpose. They have worked, and still work, whereas non binary roles seem to me to be useless. They seem to be almost a cry for help, or a product of a society that has lost any form of identity.

I guess the question that I have is: What function do non binary roles provide? Why do you feel the need to make up your own identity/gender? What makes you take them on?

I would also like to make the point that it is extremely difficult to near impossible to provide evidence that can be categorized on the human consciousness, so to ask for evidence as to why non binary roles are an issue is simply not possible. I can't quantify it or write a research paper, hence why I asked the above questions.

As for the rest of it, yes, I was passionate about my points. I could be seen as arrogant, but I am tired of the Hillary camp ignoring things like corruption, of which you described not less then three times, because Trump "hurts my feelings". I personally don't care if he is racist or misogynistic. Those are personal beliefs, and you seem to think that 100+ years of equal rights can suddenly be undone.

Again, he is not Hitler, he doesn't have the populace not the power to make a single law forbidding blacks or women from doing anything. Equal rights has it's leaders, but it's a cultural change, and would need to have a vast majority of the population to reverse, and that is simply not going to happen.

However, corruption on the other hand can and does sway how people live. Think about GMO labeling laws for a second. A few corrupt companies get a few puppets into office and all of a sudden, they are able to block your knowledge of what you eat. I don't know if a tomato has GMO's or not, because it is not a requirement, and labeling is actually stopped. That is what Clinton represents, more corruption and behind doors deals, which do have a impact on my life.

That is again, why I lean more toward Trump, because however racist he might be, he is not a corrupt as Hillary.

Somewhere_ November 3rd, 2016 3:09 PM

According to those same sources, Trump will increase the employment rate. So if you want a non-government job in the US, and believe the projections, vote Trump.

Thats only if its the only issue you care about though. You just have to weigh the positive and negatives, and weigh if you think your personal gain is better than the benefit of everyone.

0 November 3rd, 2016 3:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadSheep (Post 9474587)
According to those same sources, Trump will increase the employment rate. So if you want a non-government job in the US, and believe the projections, vote Trump.

Thats only if its the only issue you care about though. You just have to weigh the positive and negatives, and weigh if you think your personal gain is better than the benefit of everyone.

Exactly. It's not enough for him to just raise wages, certainly not enough to vote for him. But it is a good point.

gimmepie November 3rd, 2016 3:38 PM

I just want to jump in with a couple of quick points.

1. I don't think most of us are saying that Trump is going to be able to turn the US into Fascist Germany single handed, free of any opposition or w/e if he manages to get elected. That's not the problem. The problems here are that

a. He will get some stuff through, because even though the Republicans as a who;e don't like Trump much either, they do have a lot of overlapping policies. With Trump as president life will absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, get harder for minority groups. Civil rights will take a hit.

b. It will cause issues with US foreign diplomacy. Trump is poorly educated, doesn't care who he offends, thinks he knows more about military strategy than he does and is an unabashed racist who is quite happy to let Russia/Putin manipulate US politics. He's making nice with the one large country who hates the US and alienating legions of existing allies. You want a leader that will make you more friendships not lose most of them in exchange for Russia - who will basically be running your country at that point. Not to mention the wars he will inevitably start.

c. Even though Trump will not be able to get every twisted idea he has passed and turn the US into some twisted totalitarian state, if he secures the presidency it does the worst thing it possibly could. It legitimizes his worldview and behaviour. If the president is allowed to be a xenophobic, stupid sexual predator who doesn't care whom he hurts as he shits on lower socio-economic classes then suddenly it becomes perfectly reasonable for the KKK to exist, for police to be prejudiced towards minorities and for homosexuals to be barred from marrying. Trump being elected doesn't necessarily mean it will become legal to go around beating gays or Mexicans to death but it will socially legitimise that behaviour.

2. If you think that the US and your immediate neighbours are the only countries that's going to be effected by the outcome of this election you're extremely detached from the rest of the world. The US is a superpower with a lot of influence, a lot of allies (and a lot of enemies) and a huge economy that has a profound effect on the global economy. If Clinton wins things will remain mostly unchanged internationally. But if Trump wins, global politics will change and as, unlike Trump-style economics, that kind of sudden change and radical leadership for a previously moderate superpower has an enormous trickle-down effect that will make sure that change is dramatic. It might be a US election, but its not just North America that stands to lose a lot from a Trump presidency.

It does not matter that Clinton is inherently flawed as a candidate because both from a domestic and a global standpoint, Trump is not only an objectively far worse candidate but also a dangerous one that would not just have a negative impact on the US as President but on the rest of the world as well.

0 November 3rd, 2016 5:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9474613)
I just want to jump in with a couple of quick points.

1. I don't think most of us are saying that Trump is going to be able to turn the US into Fascist Germany single handed, free of any opposition or w/e if he manages to get elected. That's not the problem. The problems here are that

a. He will get some stuff through, because even though the Republicans as a who;e don't like Trump much either, they do have a lot of overlapping policies. With Trump as president life will absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, get harder for minority groups. Civil rights will take a hit.



I'm truly amazed that you can read the future! Incredible! So that's how it is. Life will automatically be harder absolutely, without the shadow of a doubt for minority groups?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9474613)
b. It will cause issues with US foreign diplomacy. Trump is poorly educated, doesn't care who he offends, thinks he knows more about military strategy than he does and is an unabashed racist who is quite happy to let Russia/Putin manipulate US politics. He's making nice with the one large country who hates the US and alienating legions of existing allies. You want a leader that will make you more friendships not lose most of them in exchange for Russia - who will basically be running your country at that point. Not to mention the wars he will inevitably start.

What will cause issues, a Trump presidency? Trump is poorly educated in what way? Oh, you mean that one other country that also has the firepower to destroy the world hundreds of times over? Yep, bad idea to make friends with the bully, ok. I am again amazed that you know about the war he will inevitably start! How will life be with Hillary???

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9474613)
c. Even though Trump will not be able to get every twisted idea he has passed and turn the US into some twisted totalitarian state, if he secures the presidency it does the worst thing it possibly could. It legitimizes his worldview and behaviour. If the president is allowed to be a xenophobic, stupid sexual predator who doesn't care whom he hurts as he shits on lower socio-economic classes then suddenly it becomes perfectly reasonable for the KKK to exist, for police to be prejudiced towards minorities and for homosexuals to be barred from marrying. Trump being elected doesn't necessarily mean it will become legal to go around beating gays or Mexicans to death but it will socially legitimise that behaviour.

I love how everyone think Trump is so twisted and evil, and they just brush off Hillary like she isn't twisted herself. Like seriously, lmao here.

But again, your future reading powers really must come in handy. I mean, one mans world view is suddenly reflected on his entire population of over 300 + million right off the bat? That's really incredible, I almost can't believe it.

Xenophobic - deep-rooted fear towards foreigners. Interesting, so all the deals and friendships he has made with blacks doesn't count? Becoming friends with Russia doesn't count?

"stupid sexual predator" What is the meaning of this? The accusations and such? I don't think he has even been convicted of such a thing, but maybe you have evidence to the contrary?

Most of the founding fathers had slaves, that didn't suddenly legitimize their worldview or make slavery cool. Same here. Trump simply becoming president doesn't taint the presidency, even if you are racist. Again, his views are all talk, and aside from your future readings, you have no evidence that Trump can reverse 150 years of civil rights.

I find the KKK existing perfectly reasonable, as long as they don't start hanging blacks or beating them. Again, your world views are one thing, your actions are another. They are not equal. Having homicidal thoughts doesn't make you a murderer. Having suicidal thoughts doesn't mean you've killed yourself. Thoughts != Actions.

Police being prejudiced has literally nothing to do with Trump becoming president. Nothing.

Gay marriage should be a community matter, and people have allowed the federal government to control this. Seriously though, Trump here again?

Lol, how does Trump becoming president = legitimizing beating gay people? lmao, what?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9474613)
2. If you think that the US and your immediate neighbours are the only countries that's going to be effected by the outcome of this election you're extremely detached from the rest of the world. The US is a superpower with a lot of influence, a lot of allies (and a lot of enemies) and a huge economy that has a profound effect on the global economy. If Clinton wins things will remain mostly unchanged internationally. But if Trump wins, global politics will change and as, unlike Trump-style economics, that kind of sudden change and radical leadership for a previously moderate superpower has an enormous trickle-down effect that will make sure that change is dramatic. It might be a US election, but its not just North America that stands to lose a lot from a Trump presidency.

I am not understanding how you arrived at me believing that. So, to clear the record, what I said was that countries, like Australia, Spain, etc are effected by the presidency, as the USA is a world super power. However, you are all not nearly effected as much as say me or Nah. We have to live with whoever wins, under their direct rule, so while you all are looking mostly at foreign policy, I am looking at domestic policy, as frankly, that matters to me more then what the USA does in other countries. You have your own rulers/governments, who provide the infrastructure for you to work, get health care, and find jobs so you can eat, where as we in the USA are directly effected by who wins. And it's not looking too good either way.

As Badsheep mentioned above, a higher minimum wage is significant to us in the USA, but not nearly as much as someone in Australia. Hell, you probably skipped over that, but what it means that I can put better food on the table for me and my family. While Hillary prances about playing with our allies (I know the importance of this), I'm sitting here looking for another damn job because my current one doesn't pay enough, because companies here are allow to pay scraps. So, in this respect, Trump represents a better candidate to me.

Don't think I don't know that a higher minimum wage would be short term. But this is what directly effects me, while it doesn't affect you. If I had to pick, Trump seems to be more for me then Hillary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9474613)
It does not matter that Clinton is inherently flawed as a candidate because both from a domestic and a global standpoint, Trump is not only an objectively far worse candidate but also a dangerous one that would not just have a negative impact on the US as President but on the rest of the world as well.

I am getting extremely sick of hearing this one rehashed for the 100th time. "Clinton is flawed, but that doesn't matter because Trump is a meanie who says mean things which hurt my feelings." Like you literally are putting Clinton in a blind spot while Trump gets the negative limelight.

I see few to no Hillary supporters going "Well, these are Hillary's flaws, these are Trump's flaws, this is why I choose Hillary over Trump." This is exactly what I've done, except I've either take a no confidence stance, or a Trump stance like now.

What is most every Hillary supporter on this thread doing? "THESE ARE TRUMPS FLAWS!!! What, Hillary has flaws? (brush under the table) WELL TRUMP IS WASIST!!!!!!!!!! Hillary and some emails? Oh, that's nothing compared to TRUMPS MISOGYNISTIC ATTITUDE!"

Come on, be real. I accept the fact that Trump is a racist. I accept the fact that he'd probably make the country worse if he wins. But I have to accept that second fact with Hillary too. I've had to accept it with at least the past two presidents, and it seems it will be a third.

But I've seen both of their flaws, and I think Trump is better. His attitude might be rude or offensive, but I'd rather have a loudmouth who can be stopped then a quiet sneak who hides in the shadows.

It was fun playing devils advocate, as again, I vote no confidence. But you can now see that I vote Trump over Clinton. So, go for it.

Somewhere_ November 3rd, 2016 5:31 PM

While I do not think Trump will trample on civil rights (cause he can't), he will place judges in the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. Both Trump and Pence have an interest in doing so.

If you believe abortion is an essential right for women, that right will most likely take a hit. The effects of such would be huge. Gimmepie definitely has a valid point here.

I wont even cover the rest of the post because I would rather engage in a fruitful discussion about Clinton and Trump's policies than a petty debate on their obvious and aggregious personality and character flaws. We (and Americans around the states and around the world) have discussed them for far a year and it has gotten nowhere. Neither side is winning this debate because both candidates are so bad. We get it: Trump, KKK, Clinton, emails, etc etc etc etc. It only displays the pitiful situation American politics is in right now and does not produce a healthy discussion. At this point, I am getting quite tired of it.

Gimme brought up foreign policy, which is very important. Especially following the Iran deal and issues with ISIS. How about we talk about this?

gimmepie November 3rd, 2016 6:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nonibros (Post 9474750)
I'm truly amazed that you can read the future! Incredible! So that's how it is. Life will automatically be harder absolutely, without the shadow of a doubt for minority groups?

You don't have to have supernatural powers to understand that electing a president who has no respect for minority groups/women is going to make life worse for those people.


Quote:

What will cause issues, a Trump presidency? Trump is poorly educated in what way? Oh, you mean that one other country that also has the firepower to destroy the world hundreds of times over? Yep, bad idea to make friends with the bully, ok. I am again amazed that you know about the war he will inevitably start! How will life be with Hillary???
Trump is poorly educated in the sense that he has next to no political knowledge, routinely spouts "facts" that are completely untrue (and seems to believe that him saying things with no research done in the matter suddenly makes them true) and had exactly no idea how an economy works.

If you think the kind of "alliance" Trump would form with Russia is going to be in any way equitable you're deluded. It would very much be Russia calling the shots - basically a superpower with another superpower as a puppet. That's going to spell bad news for global politics, it's going to create a power imbalance and it probably means all kinds of horrible shit is going to go down in the Middle East under the guise of targeting ISIS (what will actually be happening is Russia strengthening their own power).

Life with Hillary will probably be exactly the same as it is now. She's extremely similar to Obama and like Obama will probably have most of the good things she intends to do blocked by the Republicans (who will then claim the Democrats are the ones obstructing things).


Quote:

I love how everyone think Trump is so twisted and evil, and they just brush off Hillary like she isn't twisted herself. Like seriously, lmao here.
I love how you keep mistaking logical deductions as Hillary favourtism. I'm not saying that Hillary is a flawless candidate - although she's shitloads better than some people in this thread have made out. She did some really stupid stuff with those emails, she's a little more friendly with corporations than I'd like, she's made mistakes in the past but she is not even in the same ballpark as Trump. Hillary is a competent politician with the correct expertise and experience to run your country. Trump is a racist, misogynistic businessman with no prior experience in politics, the temperament of a primary school bully and next to no actual policies who doesn't even handle his own money effectively or ethically. Both candidates have told lies and both have done some shady shit but to even imply that Hillary is anywhere near as bad as Trump is a complete fallacy.

Quote:

But again, your future reading powers really must come in handy. I mean, one mans world view is suddenly reflected on his entire population of over 300 + million right off the bat? That's really incredible, I almost can't believe it.
Again, I don't have to be able to read the future to make logical deductions. There is already a great deal of hyper-conservative people in the US. It was very clear that I was not saying the entire populations views are going to magically change depending on the results of the elections, but there's already a lot of people in the US with the same ridiculous viewpoints as Trump and having him in power very much sends the message that racism, ignorance, misogyny and all those other wonderful traits rampant in hyper-conservative culture are all perfectly okay. It sends the message that devaluing anyone who isn't a male in the majority demographic(s) is perfectly reasonable behaviour (it's not).

Quote:

Xenophobic - deep-rooted fear towards foreigners. Interesting, so all the deals and friendships he has made with blacks doesn't count? Becoming friends with Russia doesn't count?
Suggesting black people in the US can be considered foreigners when the vast majority of black families have been in the US since the 1800s is ridiculous and considering the way he thinks of Central America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East wanting to make friends with another primarily white country that also has a conservative agenda and tendency toward discriminating against minority groups really doesn't cut it no.

Quote:

"stupid sexual predator" What is the meaning of this? The accusations and such? I don't think he has even been convicted of such a thing, but maybe you have evidence to the contrary?
At this point I think if you need evidence that Trump is not particularly intelligent you should just check out his Twitter or listen to him talk. Did you know that the person who wrote Trumps book on business strategies for him considers it one of his greatest mistakes that he made Trump sounds almost reasonable?

As for him being a sexual predator, I believe you heard those tapes correct? That is irrefutable evidence that at least one point in his life Trump has inappropriately touched women without their consent. Don't give me that "locker room bragging" bullshit either, there's no proof of at all to suggest he was making anything up or exaggerating and plenty to the contrary - including numerous claims of sexual assault from all across the US and other misogynistic comments.

There's also been charges filed against him (twice now as a clerical error lead to the plaintiff having to refile in a different state) implicating him in the sexual assault and/or rape of minors. Now, I agree that this is a shaky point to make. The accuser is very poor and waited a very long time to file charges. She could easily be doing this for money or fame. However, she also implicated a convicted paedophile who Trump is good friends with and has spoken highly of, has her story corroborated by a woman who was apparently paid to manipulate young girls into coming to parties said friend and Trump both attended and Trumps own attitude towards women and indisputable ideas about how women should look and act don't really help his case.

Quote:

Most of the founding fathers had slaves, that didn't suddenly legitimize their worldview or make slavery cool. Same here. Trump simply becoming president doesn't taint the presidency, even if you are racist. Again, his views are all talk, and aside from your future readings, you have no evidence that Trump can reverse 150 years of civil rights.
It doesn't now but it sure as hell did at the time. If early presidents had been speaking out against slavery and denouncing the slave trade, it would have added a lot of legitimacy to the anti-slavery view and would probably have resulted in slavery being abolished long before Lincoln. Unfortunately though, the majority of people in the US at the time were racist and politicians were no exception to that rule. But yes, it doesn't make it okay now but back then US leaders being pro-slavery definitely added legitimacy to slave ownership and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

His views aren't all talk, they can and do effect his actions and there's no evidence to suggest that will change if he secures the presidency. His beliefs and his actions are intimately related and you're wearing rose-coloured glasses if you think his getting elected will suddenly make him a decent human being.

Trump's not going to overturn 150 years of civil rights and I didn't say he would. He has however made it abundantly clear that he intends to overturn the legalization of gay marriage which will be a huge step backwards for civil rights. You can argue all you want about him "only returning the decision to the states" but that's with him knowing full well that there's a lot of highly-religious, ultra-conservative states that will proceed to ban it once more. It's also ignoring that states shouldn't have that kind of power anyway which is a whole different kettle of fish.

Trump has also made it pretty damn clear that he doesn't think particularly highly of immigrants or Muslims. He's implied numerous times that he wants to ban Islamic religious attire, he's happy to split up families and separate legal children from illegal parents, wants to make it even harder to immigrate to the US legally (even though it's already extremely difficult to do so) and he constantly implies that illegal immigrants are all rapist and drug mules even though most of them are running away from that kind of criminal activity. This is not just his own messed-up perspective on the world this is his policy.

Quote:

I find the KKK existing perfectly reasonable, as long as they don't start hanging blacks or beating them. Again, your world views are one thing, your actions are another. They are not equal. Having homicidal thoughts doesn't make you a murderer. Having suicidal thoughts doesn't mean you've killed yourself. Thoughts != Actions.
You also think that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are equally as bad as one another despite all evidence to the contrary, you're hardly displaying the best judgement so it doesn't at all surprise me that you find the existence of a group that exists specifically to hate minority groups is okay.

Thoughts don't always equal actions, but the things is people with homicidal thoughts are a lot more likely to commit murder. People with suicidal thoughts are a lot more likely to kill themselves. Thoughts might not necessarily equal actions outright but there is a pretty strong correlation between the two. That's why people who believe in their own racial superiority, who hate minority groups and who spout discriminatory rhetoric are a lot more likely to actually engage in behaviour that negatively effects the people they hate.

Quote:

Police being prejudiced has literally nothing to do with Trump becoming president. Nothing.
Him being president won't change their views one way or the other no, it will just legitimize them. I've already explained how this works.

Quote:

Gay marriage should be a community matter, and people have allowed the federal government to control this. Seriously though, Trump here again?
Civil rights should absolutely not be a community matter. Ever. It should absolutely be the federal government making that call. The states in the US have far, far too much power and that's a big part of why you have such a convoluted legal system over there. Not to mention all consenting, legal adults should have the ability to marry - maybe not religiously but the ability to enter into a legitimate fully recognized marriage should be there.

This "give the power back to the states" rhetoric is usually just homophobes making any excuse to see gay marriage overturned but more importantly is also just a fundamentally stupid idea.

Quote:

Lol, how does Trump becoming president = legitimizing beating gay people? lmao, what?
Socially legitimate =/= legal. It might not make gay bashing legal and Trump himself might not be anti-gay (although I'm pretty damn sure he is) but Trump is very much perceived as anti-gay so him being in power automatically gives social credibility to those people whether we like it or not. It's ludicrous, but it's how society works.

Quote:

I am not understanding how you arrived at me believing that. So, to clear the record, what I said was that countries, like Australia, Spain, etc are effected by the presidency, as the USA is a world super power. However, you are all not nearly effected as much as say me or Nah. We have to live with whoever wins, under their direct rule, so while you all are looking mostly at foreign policy, I am looking at domestic policy, as frankly, that matters to me more then what the USA does in other countries. You have your own rulers/governments, who provide the infrastructure for you to work, get health care, and find jobs so you can eat, where as we in the USA are directly effected by who wins. And it's not looking too good either way.
I didn't intend to imply it would effect everyone equally. I just want to make it clear that it will have a noticeable global effect. I would argue though that whilst it might be the American election it will probably have a bigger effect on the middle east than anywhere else.

Quote:

As Badsheep mentioned above, a higher minimum wage is significant to us in the USA, but not nearly as much as someone in Australia. Hell, you probably skipped over that, but what it means that I can put better food on the table for me and my family. While Hillary prances about playing with our allies (I know the importance of this), I'm sitting here looking for another damn job because my current one doesn't pay enough, because companies here are allow to pay scraps. So, in this respect, Trump represents a better candidate to me.
If you think that Donald Trump - or the vast majority of conservative candidates actually - are ever going to improve things for the working class, you've got another thing coming. Trump's policies benefit one group of people - rich, white men.

Quote:

Don't think I don't know that a higher minimum wage would be short term. But this is what directly effects me, while it doesn't affect you. If I had to pick, Trump seems to be more for me then Hillary.
I actually haven't heard that Trump intends to raise the minimum wage. I'm very curious how he plans on doing that whilst simultaneously destroying your economy since a weak economy means lower wages. Not that Trump actually cares so long as rich people are taxed less.

I'm not entirely sure how Hillary stands on minimum wage either to be completely fair, but I do know that her policies benefit the lower socio-economic classes a lot more than Trumps do. Trump is going to make welfare payments harder to obtain, he's going to make affordable health care and insurance harder to obtain and he's going to make your economy much weaker which means raising the minimum wage will be borderline impossible. He's also completely against renewable energy which means lots of jobs that could be created won't be. Hillary is basically the opposite of that, which is a good thing.

As a side note, you shouldn't be basing your vote off of one issue.


Quote:

I am getting extremely sick of hearing this one rehashed for the 100th time. "Clinton is flawed, but that doesn't matter because Trump is a meanie who says mean things which hurt my feelings." Like you literally are putting Clinton in a blind spot while Trump gets the negative limelight.
It has nothing to do with Trump "hurting feelings". Trump winning the election isn't just going to make a few people sad it's going to set social progress back several years, tt's going to make the rich richer and poor poorer, it's going to hurt foreign relations and have a definitely negative impact on the entire globe and it's also going to ruin your economy whilst he's at it. Oh, he's also going to let Putin run your country. He doesn't have the right temperament to lead a country, has bad business skills, is a sexual predator most-likely, he's a racist and misogynist and has exactly no redeeming traits at all except his apparently going to somehow raise minimum wage and create jobs even though doing that in a weak economy is basically impossible.

Comparatively, Hillary is a bit too friendly with corporate backers (this is a bad thing to base the vote on because anything that benefits the corporations also benefits Trump), she screwed up with some emails once and armed insurgents without forethought in the middle east a few years back. But unlike Trump, she's also got plenty of redeeming qualities. She's not going to set social progress backwards, she's not going to let a foreign nation run the show, she's not going to allow that same nation to completely take control of the middle east, she's going to strengthen the economy and promote green energy, she's planning to invest in education and make it easier to attain a higher degree of education, she's going to raise taxes on the rich which means less money will have to come out of the pocket of the poor and she's going to make it easier to attain healthcare and insurance. This is all on top of having actual political experience, plenty of positive achievements in her track record and a demeanour that's actually befitting a world leader.

Quote:

I see few to no Hillary supporters going "Well, these are Hillary's flaws, these are Trump's flaws, this is why I choose Hillary over Trump." This is exactly what I've done, except I've either take a no confidence stance, or a Trump stance like now.
You say that but I've seen several times over that being done. Alien does it frequently, Hands does it frequently and I literally just did exactly that in the paragraph prior to this one. The problem isn't that you're not seeing anyone mention Hillary's flaws it's that you're not happy with the conclusion we're drawing - Hillary has less flaws than Trump does.

I also love how you keep claiming to take a no confidence stance but then go on to not only support him subtly but also openly admit to taking a pro-trump stance in your last post.

Quote:

What is most every Hillary supporter on this thread doing? "THESE ARE TRUMPS FLAWS!!! What, Hillary has flaws? (brush under the table) WELL TRUMP IS WASIST!!!!!!!!!! Hillary and some emails? Oh, that's nothing compared to TRUMPS MISOGYNISTIC ATTITUDE!"
Nobody is brushing Clinton's faults under the table. I just listed several and so have other people. She's just a better candidate and has less faults. Also, I love how you're implying that racism and misogyny are somehow okay for a president and that those are trumps only flaws even though he'll be an economic and foreign relations disaster.

Quote:

Come on, be real. I accept the fact that Trump is a racist. I accept the fact that he'd probably make the country worse if he wins. But I have to accept that second fact with Hillary too. I've had to accept it with at least the past two presidents, and it seems it will be a third.
Okay, you're never going to hear me say that George W. Bush didn't make your country worse because he was god awful and probably the only President in your history who could be worse than Trump. Even Reagan wasn't that bad and from my understanding he was pretty terrible. However this constant implication from Trump supporters (can we stop pretending you aren't one now?) that Obama was a bad president is ridiculous. He inherited a huge mess from his predecessor and actually cleaned it up quite well, he's improved civil rights in your country and has advocated for better health policy. The problem is that he was also blocked constantly by a party full of conservatives who don't really care about any of those things. He in no way made your country worse and certainly not to the extend that Bush did or that Trump would. Hillary is much the same and I'd take stagnancy over a downward spiral any day if it was up to me.

Quote:

But I've seen both of their flaws, and I think Trump is better. His attitude might be rude or offensive, but I'd rather have a loudmouth who can be stopped then a quiet sneak who hides in the shadows.
Actually you've downplayed several of Trumps flaws and completely ignored his awful economic and foreign policies whilst simultaneously not making any actual case at all against Clinton. That's hardly taking an unbiased look at both their flaws and making a comparison.

So what you're saying is you'd rather a lunatic with no morals who has no has no political experience, who is openly racist, homophobic and misogynistic, who will destroy what's left of your economy and ruin your foreign relations so long as he is open about being an asshole? Not to mention that you're also ignoring all of Trumps illegal and/or shady dealings including sexual assault, abusing illegal immigrant workers and tax evasion. Hell, he won't even release his tax returns (Clinton has).

You prefer that to an actual politician who knows what they're doing, has a demeanour actually suitable for a head of state, won't set social progress back by years, won't ruin the economy just to benefit people who are already rich and who won't totally screw up our country's global reputation and relationships... because she actually acts like a politician.

I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're at least being logical but you're not. You've actually given no reason at all for your dislike of Clinton other than her being "a snake" which is not only just you giving in to campaign rhetoric with no real evidence against her besides the email incident (for which all charges have been dropped I'm fairly sure) but is also a better way of describing her opponent.

Quote:

It was fun playing devils advocate, as again, I vote no confidence. But you can now see that I vote Trump over Clinton. So, go for it.
You weren't playing devils advocate. You were very clearly taking a pro-Trump position without ever actually giving either candidate real critiques. Saying you don't support either and that you're just playing devils advocate doesn't make it true. Kind of like how Trump claiming he doesn't discriminate doesn't make it true. You're a Trump supporter. At least own up to it if you're going to defend him and take a stance against Clinton - evidence be damned.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:52 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.